Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
230 lines (193 loc) · 20.7 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

230 lines (193 loc) · 20.7 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for mozilla/addons-server

Mitigation Strategy: Rigorous Static Analysis of Submitted Add-ons (within addons-server)

  • Description:

    1. Submission Pipeline Integration (Server-Side): The addons-server code itself handles the initial reception of add-on submissions. Immediately upon receiving a submission, the server triggers the static analysis process before storing the add-on permanently.
    2. Multiple Analysis Tools (Server-Side Components): The addons-server either directly integrates with or calls out to multiple static analysis tools. These tools are treated as server-side components or services.
      • JavaScript Linter (Server-Side Execution): A linter (e.g., ESLint with security plugins) is executed by the server on the extracted JavaScript code from the add-on.
      • Manifest Analyzer (Server-Side Component): A dedicated component within addons-server parses and analyzes the manifest.json file, checking for excessive/suspicious permissions.
      • Dangerous API/Pattern Checker (Server-Side Logic): addons-server contains code (e.g., Python functions, regular expressions) that directly scans the add-on's code for known dangerous API calls and patterns. This logic is part of the server's codebase.
    3. Dangerous API/Pattern Database (Server-Managed): The addons-server maintains and manages a database (or a configuration file loaded into memory) of dangerous APIs, code patterns, and regular expressions. This database is accessed directly by the server-side analysis logic.
    4. Fuzzy Hashing (Server-Side Calculation): The addons-server calculates a fuzzy hash (e.g., ssdeep, TLSH) of the add-on's code on the server.
    5. Fuzzy Hash Comparison (Server-Side Database Query): The addons-server queries its own database (or an associated service) to compare the calculated fuzzy hash against known malicious add-on hashes.
    6. Obfuscation Detection (Server-Side Heuristics): addons-server includes code (e.g., Python functions) that implements heuristics to detect code obfuscation within the add-on's JavaScript.
    7. Rejection/Flagging (Server-Side Decision): Based on the results of all the server-side analysis steps, addons-server either automatically rejects the submission (database update to mark as rejected) or flags it for manual review (database update to mark for review).
    8. Regular Updates (Server-Side Updates): The static analysis tools, the dangerous API/pattern database, and the fuzzy hash database are updated as part of the addons-server deployment process.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Malicious Code Injection (Severity: Critical): Prevents add-ons with malicious JavaScript from being accepted by the server.
    • Excessive Permission Requests (Severity: High): The server identifies and flags/rejects add-ons requesting excessive permissions.
    • Known Malware Distribution (Severity: Critical): The server detects and prevents the acceptance of known malware.
    • Obfuscated Malware (Severity: High): The server flags potentially obfuscated code for further review.

  • Impact:

    • Malicious Code Injection: Risk reduction: 80-90% (server-side enforcement).
    • Excessive Permission Requests: Risk reduction: 70-80% (server-side validation).
    • Known Malware Distribution: Risk reduction: 95%+ (server-side database lookup).
    • Obfuscated Malware: Risk reduction: 50-60% (server-side heuristics).

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Likely: Some basic linting and manifest.json validation are part of the addons-server code.
    • Possible: A custom tool for dangerous API detection might be integrated into the server.
    • Unlikely: Comprehensive fuzzy hashing, obfuscation detection, and a fully integrated, regularly updated database are less likely to be fully within the addons-server codebase.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Fully integrated, multi-tool static analysis pipeline within the addons-server codebase.
    • Server-managed and regularly updated database of dangerous APIs, patterns, and fuzzy hashes.
    • Robust, server-side obfuscation detection logic.
    • Automated rejection/flagging logic based on analysis results, all handled by the server.

Mitigation Strategy: Dynamic Analysis (Sandboxing) of Submitted Add-ons (with addons-server interaction)

  • Description:

    1. Submission Queue (Server-Managed): addons-server maintains a queue of add-on submissions that are awaiting dynamic analysis.
    2. Sandbox Orchestration (Server-Initiated): addons-server is responsible for initiating the dynamic analysis process. This might involve:
      • Sending a message to a separate sandboxing service.
      • Provisioning a new sandbox environment (e.g., creating a new Docker container).
      • Copying the add-on package to the sandbox.
    3. Execution Command (Server-Provided): addons-server provides the command to execute the add-on within the sandbox.
    4. Result Retrieval (Server-Handled): addons-server retrieves the results of the dynamic analysis from the sandbox (or the sandboxing service). This might involve:
      • Polling for results.
      • Receiving a callback from the sandboxing service.
      • Retrieving a report file from a shared storage location.
    5. Rejection/Flagging (Server-Side Decision): Based on the dynamic analysis report, addons-server either automatically rejects the submission or flags it for manual review. This decision is made by the server's code.
    6. Timeout Management (Server-Enforced): addons-server enforces a timeout for the dynamic analysis process. If the analysis takes too long, the server terminates the process and flags the add-on.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Zero-Day Exploits (Severity: Critical): The server facilitates the detection of zero-day exploits through dynamic analysis.
    • Evasive Malware (Severity: High): The server helps identify malware that evades static analysis.
    • Data Exfiltration (Severity: High): The server processes reports that can reveal data exfiltration attempts.
    • Cryptojacking (Severity: Medium): The server handles reports that can indicate cryptojacking.

  • Impact:

    • Zero-Day Exploits: Risk reduction: 60-70% (server-orchestrated analysis).
    • Evasive Malware: Risk reduction: 70-80% (server-initiated dynamic analysis).
    • Data Exfiltration: Risk reduction: 80-90% (server processing of analysis reports).
    • Cryptojacking: Risk reduction: 75-85% (server handling of analysis reports).

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Unlikely: Full integration with a dynamic analysis system is complex.
    • Possible: addons-server might have basic hooks for triggering external analysis, but not full orchestration and result processing.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Complete integration with a dynamic analysis system, including provisioning, execution, and result retrieval, all managed by addons-server.
    • Server-side logic for handling timeouts and making rejection/flagging decisions based on dynamic analysis reports.
    • A robust queuing system for managing submissions awaiting dynamic analysis.

Mitigation Strategy: API Security (Specifically for addons-server APIs)

  • Description:

    1. Authentication (Server-Side Enforcement): All API endpoints within addons-server require authentication. The server code validates API keys, OAuth 2.0 tokens, or other credentials before processing any request.
    2. Authorization (Server-Side Logic): addons-server implements granular authorization checks. For each API request, the server verifies that the authenticated user/application has the necessary permissions to perform the requested action. This logic is part of the server's codebase.
    3. Input Validation (Server-Side Schemas): addons-server defines strict schemas for all API parameters. The server code validates incoming requests against these schemas before processing them. Invalid requests are rejected.
    4. Add-on Metadata Validation (Server-Side Checks): addons-server performs specific validation on add-on metadata received via API calls (e.g., name, description, version, permissions). This includes checks for length limits, allowed characters, and consistency.
    5. Rate Limiting (Server-Side Implementation): addons-server implements rate limiting for all API endpoints. The server tracks the number of requests from each user/application and blocks requests that exceed the defined limits. This logic is part of the server's codebase.
    6. CSRF Protection (Server-Side Tokens): If the addons-server API is used by web frontends, the server generates and validates anti-CSRF tokens to prevent Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks.
    7. API Access Logging (Server-Side Logging): addons-server logs all API requests, including the user/application, the endpoint, the parameters, and the response status. These logs are stored securely and monitored.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Unauthorized API Access (Severity: Critical): Authentication and authorization prevent unauthorized users/applications from accessing the API.
    • Data Breaches (Severity: Critical): Granular authorization limits the potential damage from a compromised API key.
    • Injection Attacks (Severity: High): Input validation prevents attackers from injecting malicious data into the server.
    • Denial-of-Service (DoS) Attacks (Severity: High): Rate limiting prevents attackers from overwhelming the API.
    • Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) (Severity: High): CSRF protection prevents attackers from hijacking user sessions.
    • Malicious Add-on Submission via API (Severity: Critical): Specific validation of add-on metadata via the API prevents malicious submissions.

  • Impact:

    • Unauthorized API Access: Risk reduction: 99%+. Strong authentication is highly effective.
    • Data Breaches: Risk reduction: 70-80% (depends on the granularity of authorization).
    • Injection Attacks: Risk reduction: 90%+. Strict input validation is highly effective.
    • Denial-of-Service (DoS) Attacks: Risk reduction: 80-90%. Rate limiting is effective.
    • Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF): Risk reduction: 99%+. Anti-CSRF tokens are highly effective.
    • Malicious Add-on Submission via API: Risk reduction: 80-90% (server-side validation).

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Likely: Basic authentication and authorization are implemented.
    • Likely: Some level of input validation exists.
    • Possible: Rate limiting might be implemented, but may not be comprehensive.
    • Possible: CSRF protection might be in place if the API is used by web frontends.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Comprehensive, granular authorization checks for all API endpoints.
    • Strict input validation schemas for all API parameters.
    • Robust rate limiting with different limits for different endpoints and user roles.
    • Complete and consistent CSRF protection (if applicable).
    • Thorough API access logging and monitoring.
    • Specific, in-depth validation of add-on metadata submitted via the API.

Mitigation Strategy: Dependency Management (within addons-server build process)

  • Description:

    1. Dependency Tracking (Build System): The addons-server build process uses a dependency management tool (e.g., pip for Python, npm for JavaScript) to explicitly list all dependencies and their versions.
    2. Vulnerability Scanning (Automated Build Step): As part of the build process, a vulnerability scanner (e.g., pip-audit, npm audit, OWASP Dependency-Check) is automatically run to check for known vulnerabilities in the declared dependencies.
    3. Build Failure (Automated): If the vulnerability scanner finds any vulnerabilities with a severity level above a defined threshold (e.g., "High" or "Critical"), the build process fails automatically. This prevents the deployment of code with known vulnerable dependencies.
    4. Dependency Pinning (Configuration): Dependencies are pinned to specific versions (or narrow version ranges) in the dependency management configuration file (e.g., requirements.txt, package-lock.json).
    5. Regular Dependency Updates (Scheduled Task/Process): A scheduled task or process is in place to regularly update dependencies to their latest secure versions. This might involve:
      • Running the dependency management tool's update command.
      • Running the vulnerability scanner again.
      • Creating a pull request with the updated dependencies.
    6. SCA Tool Integration (Optional, but Recommended): A Software Composition Analysis (SCA) tool is integrated into the build process to provide more comprehensive vulnerability analysis and license compliance checks.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Known Vulnerabilities in Dependencies (Severity: High to Critical): Prevents the deployment of code that relies on libraries with known security vulnerabilities.
    • Supply Chain Attacks (Severity: High): Reduces the risk of a compromised dependency being introduced into the codebase.

  • Impact:

    • Known Vulnerabilities in Dependencies: Risk reduction: 90%+. Automated vulnerability scanning and build failure are highly effective.
    • Supply Chain Attacks: Risk reduction: 60-70%. Dependency pinning and regular updates help mitigate this risk.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Likely: Dependency management with a tool like pip or npm is used.
    • Possible: Some form of vulnerability scanning might be in place.
    • Unlikely: Fully automated build failure based on vulnerability scans and regular, automated dependency updates are less likely to be fully implemented.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Automated build failure based on vulnerability scan results.
    • Regular, automated dependency updates with a scheduled task or process.
    • Integration of a comprehensive SCA tool.
    • Strict dependency pinning with a well-defined update strategy.

Mitigation Strategy: Denial of Service (DoS) Mitigation (Specific to addons-server Functionality)

  • Description:

    1. Resource Limits (Server-Side Enforcement):
      • Add-on Size Limits: addons-server enforces a strict maximum size limit for uploaded add-on packages. This limit is enforced before the add-on is fully processed or stored.
      • Submission Rate Limits (Per User/IP): addons-server limits the number of add-on submissions allowed from a single user account or IP address within a given time period.
      • Review Rate Limits (Per User): If addons-server handles user reviews, it limits the number of reviews a single user can submit within a given time period.
    2. Database Query Optimization (Server-Side Code):
      • All database queries within addons-server are carefully optimized to minimize execution time and resource consumption.
      • Appropriate indexes are used on database tables.
      • Avoidance of inefficient queries (e.g., full table scans).
    3. Caching (Server-Side Implementation):
      • addons-server implements caching for frequently accessed data (e.g., add-on metadata, search results) to reduce database load.
      • Appropriate cache invalidation strategies are used.
    4. Asynchronous Processing (Server-Side Tasks):
      • Long-running tasks (e.g., static analysis, dynamic analysis) are handled asynchronously to prevent blocking the main server thread.
      • A task queue (e.g., Celery) is used to manage these tasks.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Resource Exhaustion (Severity: High): Prevents attackers from consuming excessive server resources (CPU, memory, disk space) by uploading large add-ons, submitting numerous requests, or triggering expensive database queries.
    • Application-Layer DoS (Severity: High): Mitigates DoS attacks that target specific application functionalities (e.g., add-on submission, search).
    • Review Bombing/Manipulation (Severity: Medium): Limits the ability of users to manipulate reviews through excessive submissions.

  • Impact:

    • Resource Exhaustion: Risk reduction: 80-90%. Resource limits and query optimization are effective.
    • Application-Layer DoS: Risk reduction: 70-80% (depends on the specific mitigations implemented).
    • Review Bombing/Manipulation: Risk reduction: 85-95%. Rate limiting is very effective.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Possible: Some basic resource limits might be in place.
    • Possible: Some level of database query optimization is likely.
    • Unlikely: Comprehensive rate limiting, caching, and asynchronous processing are less likely to be fully and consistently implemented.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Comprehensive and consistent resource limits for all relevant server functionalities.
    • Thorough database query optimization and indexing.
    • Robust caching mechanisms with appropriate invalidation strategies.
    • Asynchronous processing for all long-running tasks.
    • Specific rate limits for add-on submissions and reviews.

Mitigation Strategy: Data Storage and Handling (Specific to addons-server Data)

  • Description:

    1. Secure Add-on Storage (Server Configuration/Code):
      • addons-server is configured to store add-on files in a secure location (e.g., a dedicated file system with restricted access, object storage with appropriate ACLs).
      • Access to this storage location is strictly controlled and logged.
    2. Database Security (Server Configuration/Code):
      • The database used by addons-server is configured with strong security settings (e.g., secure passwords, limited user privileges, encryption at rest and in transit).
      • Database connections from addons-server use secure protocols.
    3. Data Validation (Server-Side Code):
      • addons-server validates all data before storing it in the database or file system. This includes checks for data types, formats, and lengths.
    4. Data Sanitization (Server-Side Code):
      • addons-server sanitizes any data that is displayed to users (e.g., add-on descriptions, reviews) to prevent cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities.
    5. Regular Backups (Server Operations):
      • Regular, automated backups of the addons-server database and add-on files are performed.
      • Backups are stored securely and tested regularly.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Unauthorized Access to Add-on Files (Severity: High): Secure storage prevents attackers from directly accessing add-on files.
    • Database Breaches (Severity: Critical): Secure database configuration reduces the risk of data breaches.
    • Data Corruption (Severity: Medium): Data validation and backups help prevent and recover from data corruption.
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) (Severity: High): Data sanitization prevents XSS attacks.

  • Impact:

    • Unauthorized Access to Add-on Files: Risk reduction: 80-90% (depends on the specific storage security measures).
    • Database Breaches: Risk reduction: 70-80% (depends on the database security configuration).
    • Data Corruption: Risk reduction: 90%+. Regular backups are highly effective.
    • Cross-Site Scripting (XSS): Risk reduction: 90%+. Data sanitization is highly effective.

  • Currently Implemented:

    • Likely: Basic database security measures are in place.
    • Likely: Some level of data validation and sanitization is implemented.
    • Possible: Regular backups are performed.

  • Missing Implementation:

    • Comprehensive and consistent data validation and sanitization for all data handled by addons-server.
    • Secure storage of add-on files with strict access controls and logging.
    • Regular, automated, and tested backups.
    • Strong database security configuration, including encryption at rest and in transit.